ebake02 wrote:Doesn't matter what he spends, it's still a waste of taxpayer money. He can build whatever wall he wants, illegal aliens and smugglers will tunnel under it like they're doing now. Mexico won't be reimbursing us either, anybody who thinks so is fucking stupid.

Obviously you're in favor of and approve illegal aliens and smuggler tunnel activities.

Simple solution, drop BLU-109's, 113's, 116's and 118/Bravos on the first tunnels discovered and watch all drug and illegal alien tunnel activities secure In short order.

"NUKE 'EM ALL!" You realize a lot of these tunnels are built in border towns, right? Brilliant idea.

Have you ever had alcohol? Then you're a hypocrite. Ever smoked a cigarette? You're a hypocrite. Ever taken a painkiller or muscle relaxer? You're a hypocrite. Ever had coffee? You're a hypocrite.

A drug is a drug is a drug, legal or otherwise. Do you advocate dropping bombs on domestic pot farmers as well?

And he's right. They'll find a way to get in.

“The Border Patrol has done an incredible job, given its resources,” said Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, the White House drug policy director in the Clinton administration. “But it would be a stretch to say that the border and border communities are secure when the agency lacks a high-confidence ability to detect cross-border tunnels. No wall is going to fix that.”

God better be wearing his titanium cup when I arrive to be judged, cause the very first thing I'm going to do is break my foot off in his balls. Liberals and Dems are proof that Satan has, to some extent, a sense of humor.

JBlake wrote:Simple solution, drop BLU-109's, 113's, 116's and 118/Bravos on the first tunnels discovered and watch all drug and illegal alien tunnel activities secure In short order.

Tie that bandana 'round your head, Rambo. You may as well get up and close and personal if you want results. Get your hands dirty. Bombing empty tunnels won't do shit.

This has absolutely nothing to do with fictional movies, well unless you're living your entire life in a fictional world.

God better be wearing his titanium cup when I arrive to be judged, cause the very first thing I'm going to do is break my foot off in his balls. Liberals and Dems are proof that Satan has, to some extent, a sense of humor.

Or perhaps knows that they are going to be kicked the fuck out for years of committing, among other things, waste, fraud and abuse.

God better be wearing his titanium cup when I arrive to be judged, cause the very first thing I'm going to do is break my foot off in his balls. Liberals and Dems are proof that Satan has, to some extent, a sense of humor.

UncleKG wrote:Well, since you used such an unbiased and scholarly source as Conservative Review.com

Let's see what MIT has to say:"(D)rump might say it would be worth the cost since border crossings are out of control. However, because of several factors, including improvements in the Mexican economy and increases in Border Patrol staffing, fewer people are making the attempt. Officers caught 331,000 people crossing the Mexican border in fiscal 2015, less than one-fifth the number in 2000."

So, you can't show cause and effect it's the wall that's stopping them. Also, note that MIT expects the cost to be as high as $40 billion, not including maintenance.

Pew Research (who Drump referred to as the organization that supposedly said there were millions of illegal voters, even though they didn't) says this:

"The drop in Mexican emigration to the U.S. during and since the Great Recession has at least three main causes. First, there was a decrease in the number of jobs available in the U.S. to Mexican immigrants, particularly in construction. Second, since the mid-2000s there has been stricter enforcement of immigration laws at the U.S.-Mexico border (with the number of Border Patrol agents now above 17,000) and an increase in the number of deportations of Mexican immigrants. Third, there are demographic changes underway in Mexico that could be affecting would-be immigrants. Today, a declining share of the population in Mexico is made up of people ages 15 to 29 (24.9% in 2014 versus 29.4% in 1990) – and immigrants are more likely to migrate at younger ages, particularly between the ages of 20 and 30 years old. This reflects the decline of the fertility rate in Mexico since the 1970s, which has led to a decades-long process of population aging in Mexico.

As Pew Research Center reported last fall in an analysis of Mexican and U.S. data, migration flows from Mexico had recently reversed for the first time since the 1940s. Between 2009 and 2014, some 870,000 Mexican immigrants arrived in the U.S. while about 1 million left. This change followed on a five-year period of net-zero migration from Mexico after several decades of large inflows of Mexican immigrants into the U.S."

So, we're going to put up a $40 billion wall that will keep more from leaving than are coming in? Makes perfect sense.

I noticed how the information mentioned talks nothing about the drug trafficking problem at the border or that it leaves open access to threats from people that wish to enter the U.S. to commit terrorist acts. As the article I presented shows the type of fencing discussed does work. It also states that while it won't keep all from getting in, it aids in controlling the rate and the speed at which they enter. Allowing for border patrol agents to do a better job at catching them. Furthermore, I do not trust what our government says the number of people entering the country illegally on the border with Mexico.

Last edited by Boomchild on Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

UncleKG wrote:I just read this in Foghorn Leghorn's voice. "I say, sir! This transgression will not stand! Not unless it's my candidate attacking people. Then and only then is it acceptable!"

I see still using the guilt by association defense in order to explain away their actions. If you can't see that attacking a 10yr child who has no control over the actions of their parent is just flat out wrong I can't help you. All you are doing is transferring the actions of his father onto him.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Memorex wrote:You'd have to go back a little more than 8 years to find a president that didn't talk about himself all the time. You think the last guy didn't have an ego? Read any speech and count the number of "I's". He had just as big of an ego, but he was more sly about it.

I wonder if today's politics are such that it takes that ego to get there. Hillary certainly praised herself a lot. Maybe it's just the state of things.

In Obama's farewell speech he referred to himself over 70 times.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Memorex wrote:You'd have to go back a little more than 8 years to find a president that didn't talk about himself all the time. You think the last guy didn't have an ego? Read any speech and count the number of "I's". He had just as big of an ego, but he was more sly about it.

I wonder if today's politics are such that it takes that ego to get there. Hillary certainly praised herself a lot. Maybe it's just the state of things.

In Obama's farewell speech he referred to himself over 70 times.

No mention of Drump saying "I didn't say millions," even though the tweet is out there for anyone to see? No mention of Drump bringing up his inauguration address and then 30 second later saying the reporter brought it up?

Did Obama refer to himself in the third person?

Last edited by UncleKG on Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Boomchild wrote:I noticed how the information mentioned talks nothing about the drug trafficking problem at the border or that it leaves open access to threats from people that wish to enter the U.S. to commit terrorist acts. As the article I presented shows the type of fencing discussed does work. It also states that while it won't keep all from getting in, it aids in controlling the rate and the speed at which they enter. Allowing for border patrol agents to do a better job at catching them. Furthermore, I do not trust what our government says the number of people entering the country illegally on the border with Mexico.

I noticed how you don't address the tunnels that we have no technology to find. I'd be interested to know how many people use the Mexico border to enter the U.S. to commit terrorist acts.

You're right, it won't keep them all from getting in, and it also doesn't let those who wish to leave (which has been a higher number than those entering over the past five years) get out.

Furthermore, I do not trust what our government says about the cost of building such a wall (MIT says $27 to $40 billion, not including maintenance).

This is what conservatives have argued for decades about taxes, minimum wage, and every other sort of government imposed tax or regulation.

Trump's threat if enacted will cause the price of Mexican produced goods sold in the US to go up. This will make goods from the US or other placed more attractive, decreasing Mexico's income. That will bring them back to the table to discuss how they will pay for his wall.

It's classic negotiation used in business, which is so foreign to how our government has worked in the past that people are freaking out.

UncleKG wrote:I noticed how you don't address the tunnels that we have no technology to find. I'd be interested to know how many people use the Mexico border to enter the U.S. to commit terrorist acts.

You're right, it won't keep them all from getting in, and it also doesn't let those who wish to leave (which has been a higher number than those entering over the past five years) get out.

Furthermore, I do not trust what our government says about the cost of building such a wall (MIT says $27 to $40 billion, not including maintenance).

What percentage of the illegal aliens use the tunnels as apposed to entering above ground? Also, the wall or fencing that is being purposed will also include under ground barriers to prevent the creation of tunnels. As to drug trafficking, yes I believe a wall or fence will aid in reducing it and I'm sure that won't be the only action that will be taken. In the article I posted it states that drug traffickers have cut holes in the flimsy single layer fencing that exists. In some cases, large enough to drive a truck through. So the trafficking is above ground as well which proper fencing would affect it. The number of terrorists entering through this border is not the point. As with 9/11 it doesn't take many to do massive damage or death. Here is an article showing that it is occurring.http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... rder-befo/

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

I'd say both A and B. The company will pay the initial tax but in turn will pass that expense on to the consumer, via higher sale prices. That's why you will pay three times the amount for a imported car in America then it costs if you purchased that same car in the country that it was built in. Prime example is a brand new Nissan Fairlady in Japan in 1990 costed roughly $26K USD but that same car purchased in the US (just renamed 280Z) cost well over that in the US. Same with America made cars in foreign countries. for example, American made cars went for great big stupid dollars in Japan back in the 80s. We're talking $80K USD and greater for models such as Mustang 5.0's and Trans Am 5.7's

So to answer your question, I think it's both A and B. Now you're leaving out a lot of other information such as how this would impact the American economy, business owners, employees, and consumer. Like my car scenario mentioned, instead of purchasing something that would cost two and three times more because it's imported, most would tend to purchase domestic for up to 1/3rd the price. Nearly all manufacturing has been outsourced out of America and to other countries now. You really don't have a choice anymore to buy American made. Levi's used to be a very quality jean. Look at the cheap shit coming out of Mexico now from that outsourced company. With Trump doing what he's doing in regards to trade, we will again have a choice to buy truly American (domestic) or foreign (imported). And that will equate into positive business for America, American businesses, business owners, employees and consumers. And ultimately A and B wouldn't effect those who have chosen to purchase American (domestic) vs foreign (imported).

God better be wearing his titanium cup when I arrive to be judged, cause the very first thing I'm going to do is break my foot off in his balls. Liberals and Dems are proof that Satan has, to some extent, a sense of humor.

I'd say both A and B. The company will pay the initial tax but in turn will pass that expense on to the consumer, via higher sale prices. That's why you will pay three times the amount for a imported car in America then it costs if you purchased that same car in the country that it was built in. Prime example is a brand new Nissan Fairlady in Japan in 1990 costed roughly $26K USD but that same car purchased in the US (just renamed 280Z) cost well over that in the US. Same with America made cars in foreign countries. for example, American made cars went for great big stupid dollars in Japan back in the 80s. We're talking $80K USD and greater for models such as Mustang 5.0's and Trans Am 5.7's

So to answer your question, I think it's both A and B. Now you're leaving out a lot of other information such as how this would impact the American economy, business owners, employees, and consumer. Like my car scenario mentioned, instead of purchasing something that would cost two and three times more because it's imported, most would tend to purchase domestic for up to 1/3rd the price. Nearly all manufacturing has been outsourced out of America and to other countries now. You really don't have a choice anymore to buy American made. Levi's used to be a very quality jean. Look at the cheap shit coming out of Mexico now from that outsourced company. With Trump doing what he's doing in regards to trade, we will again have a choice to buy truly American (domestic) or foreign (imported). And that will equate into positive business for America, American businesses, business owners, employees and consumers. And ultimately A and B wouldn't effect those who have chosen to purchase American (domestic) vs foreign (imported).

The challenge is to balance the whole thing very carefully. The cost of goods sold will be more if they are made in America vs. Vietnam. The wage difference alone dictates this. So, companies then have the choice to raise their prices to keep their profit margins on goods made in the US, or take the decreased profits and suffer the scorn of the stockholders (401k anyone?).

Most of the economic growth in the US over the past 35 years has come at the expense of the middle class - the people who work in the jobs that have been sent overseas. The purchase of a 50 inch flat screen TV at Walmart for $400 is only possible because it is made with labor rates of $10 per day, instead of $25 per hour. Increasing the price slows down the volume of sales, which decreases profits, which decreases the value of your 401k.

On CNN Thursday morning, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said that if the Trump administration attempts to pull federal funds from 'sanctuary cities,' New York will take them to court.

"New York City has half a million undocumented people, we want them to come forward and work with the police, if they see a drime or are a victim of crime. If they believe by talking to a police officer, they would get deported... they are not going to work with police," he said about the 'sanctuary cities' label.

"This is about human beings, families that came here," he said. "I want people to follow the law, I don't think people should violate our borders, but let's face it, this has been a problem in our country for hundreds of years."

Listen to this dreck, this is the kind of stupid and frankly lazy politics we have been bitching about for years. The Mayor clearly understands there is a problem but is too damn lazy, afraid or just plain stupid to realize something needs done about it. Trump has threatened to hold up to 9 billion of NYC Fed Funds if they don't clean this sanctuary shit up, same for San Fran and many other cities. Now that Trump has his attention he starts screaming instead of working to fix the problem. See the problem Mr. mayor and fix it.

Btw Mayor, using your own logic, just by being here illegally there has been a crime, so they should self report to police? You are insane.

I bet they thought these illegals would voluntary come forward with Obama's "catch and release " directive. Since the majority of them haven't come forward with the threat of detention and most likely deportation being halted, I doubt giving it more time is going to change things. The only way I would see the majority of them voluntarily coming forward would be if they were guaranteed amnesty. That should not be an option. We tried that approach back in '86 as part of a solution to end the illegal immigration problem "once and for all" and as we can see that didn't work. They still kept entering the country illegally in large numbers. Not completing the border fencing ordered at that time didn't help the issue either. Perhaps now that we have a President that plans to enforce our immigration laws they will think twice. To me that's a much better solution then ignoring the laws or doing things to subvert them. One thing is for sure, it's going to get harder for them to "hide in the shadows" since this President is going to turn on the flood lights. I say subvert their attempts to hide, catch as many as possible and deport them according to immigration law. Mandate all employers to use E Verify. Enact steep penalties on companies that knowingly employ illegal aliens. Enact laws that provide severe prison terms for those providing or selling illegals stolen IDs, SSN or any documentation that allows them to hide their true identity.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

K.C.Journey Fan wrote:This is Great News! Now Trump can get qualified people.

I'd rather see replacements then holdovers from the previous administration. This event shouldn't come as a surprise. The State Dept. acts on the Presidents positions and initiatives on foreign relations. Obama's and Trump's are vastly different.

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

K.C.Journey Fan wrote:So the little shit that started the fire and said "screw President Trump", you know, the one that looks like Pugsley Addams, turns out to be Drew Careys son. I just lost all my respect for Carey. I look forward to seeing his kid in Juvie soon.

So has CBS, NBC, NPR or CNN covered this yet?

"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington

Very wise of him. Trump is not fucking around. Some of these blow hard mayors like Emanuel, De Blasio, et al, are risking their own arrests for harboring criminals. The first time one crosses the border, it's a misdemeanor. If deported, the second time is a felony. Sanctuary cities are harboring many felons. Law & Order!

This is for those of you here that are a Democrat or progressive, liberal. Basically not associated with and are opposed to conservative values and positions. Lionel is discussing the state of the democratic party and those movements affiliated with it. Dare I say I think it's an important message if you want to be successful going forward. If you do not know this guy, he is a nationally syndicated political commentator who is not right or left and doesn't associate himself with either of the major political parties. When he is asked about party affiliation, he does not hesitate to tell you he describes himself as a political atheist. So he doesn't trumpet (pun intended) the views and positions of any one party. I like to check out his stuff from time to time to get a different point of view. I am in no way looking to punk you on this.

K.C.Journey Fan wrote:So the little shit that started the fire and said "screw President Trump", you know, the one that looks like Pugsley Addams, turns out to be Drew Careys son. I just lost all my respect for Carey. I look forward to seeing his kid in Juvie soon.

I read about that on Fox News yesterday. In the article is says that the father wasn't happy at all about what the kid did and that the kid then apologized for his actions. So at this point I don't really think it's a big deal. Kid was just exercising the right of freedom of speech and got a lot of attention out of it because of his inherited celebrity status. I'll leave it at that unless I see other things coming out showing the father is promoting that type of behavior.

On the other hand, we got individuals of adult age group acting like spoiled little shits (Madonna). I've got only three words for Madonna - Untreated Syphilis Case.

God better be wearing his titanium cup when I arrive to be judged, cause the very first thing I'm going to do is break my foot off in his balls. Liberals and Dems are proof that Satan has, to some extent, a sense of humor.

Also, why does he keep asking parks & rec for more pix (this time he wants aerial pix) of his inauguration? He's really going out of his way to try to convince everyone he had the biggest turnout ever.

Well if your referring to Trump as a stupid fucker....hahaha that's funny.

God better be wearing his titanium cup when I arrive to be judged, cause the very first thing I'm going to do is break my foot off in his balls. Liberals and Dems are proof that Satan has, to some extent, a sense of humor.

Also, why does he keep asking parks & rec for more pix (this time he wants aerial pix) of his inauguration? He's really going out of his way to try to convince everyone he had the biggest turnout ever.

To demonstrate how the media has been so bias as to the turnout figures in all of their reporting of the inauguration?

God better be wearing his titanium cup when I arrive to be judged, cause the very first thing I'm going to do is break my foot off in his balls. Liberals and Dems are proof that Satan has, to some extent, a sense of humor.